Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue

Transcription

1 Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue Decision Rationale And Finding of No Significant Impact Environmental Assessment Number OR October 2006 United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Oregon State Office Salem District Tillamook Resource Area Township 4 North, Range 2 West, Sections 29 and 31, Township 4 North, Range 3 West, Section 25, Willamette Meridian Scappoose Creek 5 th field Watershed Columbia County, Oregon Responsible Agency: USDI - Bureau of Land Management Responsible Official: Brad Keller Tillamook Resource Area 4610 Third St Tillamook, OR (503) For further information, contact: Bob McDonald Tillamook Resource Area 4610 Third St Tillamook, OR (503)

2 As the Nation s principal conservation agency, the Department of Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering economic use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interest of all people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in Island Territories under U.S. administration. BLM/OR/WA/AE-06/ Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 2

3 INTRODUCTION The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) conducted an environmental analysis documented in the Pig s Puzzle Environmental Assessment (EA # OR ) (original EA), dated February 25, The project in that EA was subsequently divided into two commercial timber sales with some associated watershed restoration work in The Pig s Puzzle Project and Pisgah Progeny Project Decision Rationale, dated September 4, That 1998 decision for the Pig s Puzzle Project was protested and the BLM s protest decision subsequently appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (Board). In April, 2000, the Board resolved the appeal by setting aside BLM s protest decision and remanding it back to the BLM due to pending resolution of Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen s Association et al. v. National Marine Fisheries Service et al. and Oregon Natural Resource Council et al. v. Allen. These legal issues have since been resolved. The BLM has reconsidered the original decision regarding Pig s Puzzle based on a new analysis of the environmental effects. The original EA was revised to clarify the project, address concerns raised during the original EA public comment period, and incorporate relevant new information The revised EA is called the Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue Environmental Assessment, which will be referred to from this point as the EA. The EA divides the timber sale and road decommissioning work into separate projects. This decision authorizes the implementation of both of those projects. DECISION TO BE MADE The decision to be made by the Tillamook Field Manager is: Whether to approve as proposed, not at all, or to some other extent the Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest (Project 1) and the Road Decommissioning work (Project 2). Whether site specific impacts would require supplemental/additional information to the analysis done in the RMP/FEIS through a new EIS. Based upon review of the Pig s Puzzle Projects EA and supporting project record, I have determined that there are no site specific impacts that would require supplemental/additional information to the analysis done in the RMP/FEIS through a new EIS. DECISION Project 1 Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest I have decided to implement the Pig s Puzzle Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest Project as described in Alternative 1 (EA pp. 6-13), with two modifications. These modifications are minor and do not change the scope of the project analyzed, nor do the modifications affect the adequacy of the analysis contained in the EA. This decision is based on site-specific analysis in the Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue Environmental Assessment (EA # OR ), the supporting project record, management recommendations contained in the Scappoose Creek Watershed Analysis; as well as the management direction contained in the Salem District Record Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 3

4 of Decision/Resource Management Plan (ROD\RMP) (May 1995), which are incorporated by reference in the EA. Hereafter, Alternative 1 is referred to as the selected alternative. The maps of the selected alternative can be found on pages 6-8 of this Decision Rationale. Modifications: 1. The haul route for the eastern portion of unit 29-2 and all of unit 29-3 will be changed from a route on existing roads going east from section 29 to Pisgah Home road, to a route going north from section 29 to Lamar s road. This change will eliminate a planned road realignment that encroaches on a stream channel. The new route involves a small amount of new road construction on top of a stable ridge and the replacement of a failing culvert on a private road (as described below), which will result in a reduction in sediment delivery into North Scappoose Creek compared to the current condition. 2. Yarding of logs will be restricted during the bark slip period. Restricting yarding to the peak bark slip period of May 1 to July 15 is a design feature designed as part of the proposed action (EA p.10), and was therefore incorporated into the analysis of environmental effects for this project. However, this restriction was inadvertently omitted from the seasonal restrictions identified in Table 2 (EA p.13). This modification corrects that omission. Decision Summary: 1. Timber Harvest: Approximately 129 acres of 70-year old conifer stands will be thinned by removing suppressed, co-dominant, and occasional dominant trees (thinning from below). Generally, the largest trees would be left. Average canopy closure will be no less than 40 percent after harvest. In addition, approximately 147 acres of 70-year old mixed conifer stands will be regeneration harvested. An average of 17 overstory trees per acre will be left for wildlife and coarse wood enhancement in the regeneration harvest area. Approximately 10 percent of the project area will be harvested using conventional ground-based logging equipment, and the remaining 90 percent will be harvested using skyline yarding systems. 2. Road Work: Approximately 0.6 miles of new road construction will occur on BLM and private lands to access the treatment areas. Another 2.6 miles of existing roads under BLM and private control will be reconstructed as necessary to accommodate log-hauling. This will include replacement of a failing culvert on a stream on private land. The approximately 0.6 miles of new and reconstructed roads will be decommissioned and blocked following timber harvest and site preparation operations. 3. Fuels Treatments: The timber sale contract will require the purchaser to treat fuels in the regeneration harvest area where fuel loading will be heavy enough to adversely affect tree planting or maintenance. This logging slash and debris will be hand piled, covered and burned. After harvest operations are completed landing debris will also be piled, covered and burned. All design features and mitigation measures described in the EA (pp ) are incorporated into the timber sale contract. Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 4

5 Project 2 Road Decommissioning I have decided to implement the Pig s Puzzle Road Decommissioning Project as described in Alternative 1 (EA p. 62), with no modifications. This decision is based on site-specific analysis in the Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue Environmental Assessment (EA # OR ), the supporting project record, management recommendations contained in the Scappoose Creek Watershed Analysis; as well as the management direction contained in the Salem District Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan (ROD\RMP) (May 1995), which are incorporated by reference in the EA. Hereafter, Alternative 1 is referred to as the selected alternative. A map of the selected alternative can be found on page 6 of this Decision Rationale. The following is a summary of this decision: The selected alternative will decommission approximately one mile of an existing naturalsurfaced road (4N-2-28) in T4N R2W section 29. This is an old BLM-controlled road that has three stream-crossing culverts, two of which are in the process of failing and are chronic sources of sediment to Fall Creek. Decommissioning will be accomplished by removing the three culverts, removing as much trapped sediment as feasible above the culverts, subsoiling the road to reduce compaction and increase water infiltration, installing waterbars to control road surface runoff, planting native species such as red alder on the road surface, and blocking both ends of the road to all vehicle traffic, including off-highway vehicles (OHVs). The selected alternative includes all the design features described in the EA (page 62). COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTION The analysis documented in the Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue EA is site-specific and supplements analyses found in the Salem District Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement, September 1994 (RMP/FEIS). This project has been designed to conform to the Salem District Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan, May 1995 (ROD/RMP) and related documents which direct and provide the legal framework for management of BLM lands within the Salem District (EA pp ). All of these documents may be reviewed at the Tillamook Resource Area office. Survey and Manage Species Review: This project fully complies with the 2001 Survey and Manage Record of Decision. All surveys conducted in 1999, 2000 and 2006 on the Pig s Puzzle project area are in full and complete compliance with the 2001 FSEIS and ROD, as modified by the 2003 Annual Species Review (ASR). As such, this project is in compliance with Judge Marsha Pechman's January, 2006 ruling on the 2004 Record of Decision for Survey and Manage Standards and Guidelines, as stated in Point (3) on page 14 of the January 9, 2006, Court order in Northwest Ecosystem Alliance et al. v. Rey et al. (EA Appendix 4 Survey and Manage Compliance Reviews). No additional surveys are necessary or planned for the area as currently designed. Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 5

6 Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 6

7 Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 7

8 Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 8

9 Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) Status Review: The following information was considered in the analysis of proposed project: a/ Scientific Evaluation of the Status of the Northern Spotted Owl (Sustainable Ecosystems Institute, Courtney et al. 2004); b/status and Trends in Demography of Northern Spotted Owls, (Anthony et al. 2004); c/ Northern Spotted Owl Five Year Review: Summary and Evaluation (USFWS, November 2004); and d/northwest Forest Plan The First Ten Years ( ): Status and trend of northern spotted owl populations and habitat, PNW Station Edit Draft (Lint, Technical Coordinator, 2005). In summary, although the agencies anticipated a decline of NSO populations under land and resource management plans during the past decade, the reports identified greater than expected NSO population declines in Washington and northern portions of Oregon, and more stationary populations in southern Oregon and northern California. The reports did not find a direct correlation between habitat conditions and changes in NSO populations, and they were inconclusive as to the cause of the declines. Lag effects from prior harvest of suitable habitat, competition with Barred Owls, and habitat loss due to wildfire were identified as current threats; West Nile Virus and Sudden Oak Death were identified as potential new threats. Complex interactions are likely among the various factors. This information has not been found to be in conflict with the NWFP or the RMP (Evaluation of the Salem District Resource Management Plan Relative to Four Northern Spotted Owl Reports, September 6, 2005). ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail: The following action alternative was evaluated but not included in detailed analysis (EA pp. 14): Thinning was considered for units 29-1 and This alternative was dropped from further consideration because it would not meet the purpose and need for action as stated on pages 5 and 6 of the EA. Specifically, it would not allow for managing timber stands to reduce the risk of loss from disease. Phellinus weirii root rot infection levels are at least 30 40% in these units, and thinning such stands may result in excessive losses from windthrow and Douglas-fir beetles (EA page 14) Alternatives Considered in Detail: The EA analyzed the effects of the proposed action and the no action alternatives. Complete descriptions of the "action" and "no action" alternatives are contained in the EA, pages and page 62. DECISION RATIONALE Project 1 Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest Considering public comment, the content of the EA and supporting project record, the Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 9

10 management recommendations contained in the Scappoose Creek Watershed Analysis, and the management direction contained in the ROD/RMP, I have decided to implement the selected alternative as described above. The following is my rationale for this decision. 1. The selected alternative: Meets the purpose and need of the project (EA section 2.1), as shown below in Table 1. Complies with the Salem District Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan, May 1995 (RMP) and related documents which direct and provide the legal framework for management of BLM lands within the Salem District (EA pp. 1-3), (DR/FONSI p. 9). All surveys conducted in 1999, 2000 and 2006 on the Pig s Puzzle Projects area are in full and complete compliance with the 2001 Survey and Manage FSEIS and ROD, as modified by the 2003 Annual Species Review. This project is in compliance with Judge Marsha Pechman's January, 2006 ruling on the 2004 Record of Decision for Survey and Manage Standards and Guidelines, as stated in Point (3) on page 14 of the January 9, 2006, Court order in Northwest Ecosystem Alliance et al. v. Rey et al. (EA Appendix 4 Survey and Manage Compliance Reviews). No additional surveys are planned for the area as currently designed. Considers new information on the northern spotted owl (EA p. 12, DR/FONSI p.9). Would not have significant impact on the affected elements of the environment (DR/FONSI pp ) beyond those already anticipated and addressed in the RMP EIS. Has been adequately analyzed. 2. The No Action alternative was not selected because it does not meet the Purpose and Need directly, or delays the achievement of the Purpose and Need (EA section 2.1), as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Comparison of the Alternatives with Regard to the Purpose of and Need for Action Project 1 Purpose and Need (EA section 2.1) No Action Selected Action Produce a sustainable supply of timber and other forest commodities (ROD/RMP p. 46). Does not fulfill. Does not contribute to a sustainable supply of timber. Fulfills. Provide an annual ASQ for the Salem District of 34.8 MMBF (ROD/RMP p. 46). Manage timber stands to reduce the risk of loss from disease (ROD/RMP p. 46). Does not fulfill. There would be no timber sale to contribute to the Salem District ASQ. Does not fulfill. Laminated root rot disease centers would continue to expand, affecting the growth and survival of surrounding Douglas-fir trees. Fulfills. Contributes approximately 8.4 MMBF to the Salem District ASQ. Fulfills. Regeneration harvest of 147 acres will replace root rot infected and susceptible Douglas-fir trees with more resistant species such as western redcedar, western hemlock and hardwoods. Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 10

11 Purpose and Need (EA section 2.1) No Action Selected Action Conduct regeneration harvest of forest stands in the General Forest Management Area that are beyond the age of CMAI (Appendix D-1). Manage developing stands to promote tree survival and growth and to achieve a balance between wood volume production, quality of wood and timber value at harvest (ROD/RMP p. 46) Address issues of effects to aquatic habitat, watershed condition, and Survey & Manage species that were subjects of appeals to the Interior Board of Land Appeals. Proceed with the previously authorized timber sales in order to contribute a sustainable supply of timber in support of the PRMP/EIS (Vol. 1, p. xii) assumptions that BLM management programs (including timber sales) would support 544 jobs and provide $9.333 million in personal income annually. Comply with Section 1 of the O&C Act (43 USC 1181a) which stipulates that O&C Lands be managed for permanent forest production, and the timber thereon shall be sold, cut, and removed in conformity with the principal of sustained yield for the purpose of providing a permanent source of timber supply, protecting watersheds, regulating stream flow, and contributing to the economic stability of local communities and industries, and providing recreational facilities Partially fulfills. The stands proposed for treatment would continue to mature Does not fulfill Fulfills. The EA addresses all of these issues. Does not fulfill. Does not fulfill. This alternative does not provide a permanent source of timber supply from O&C lands, nor does it contribute to the economic stability of local communities and industries. Partially Fulfills. Mixed conifer stands that are heavily infected with root rot will be regeneration harvested, and other conifer stands will be commercially thinned. Fulfills. Commercial thinning of 129 acres will promote survival and growth of the remaining trees, and will result in increased quantity and quality of wood production at final harvest. Fulfills. The EA addresses all of these issues. Fulfills. The selected alternative allows the BLM to award the previously sold Pig s Puzzle timber sale. Fulfills. The selected alternative will provide a permanent source of timber from the O&C lands that will be treated, both now and in the future. As described in section of the EA, there will be little or no direct, indirect or cumulative effects on stream flows or water quality. Project 2 Road Decommissioning Considering public comment, the content of the EA and supporting project record, the management recommendations contained in the Scappoose Creek Watershed Analysis, and the management direction contained in the ROD/RMP, I have decided to implement the selected alternative as described above. The following is my rationale for this decision. Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 11

12 1. The selected alternative: Meets the purpose and need of the project (EA section 2.1), as shown below in Table 2. Complies with the Salem District Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan, May 1995 (RMP) and related documents which direct and provide the legal framework for management of BLM lands within the Salem District (EA pp. 1-3), (DR/FONSI p. 9). All surveys conducted in 1999, 2000 and 2006 on the Pig s Puzzle Projects area are in full and complete compliance with the 2001 Survey and Manage FSEIS and ROD, as modified by the 2003 Annual Species Review. This project is in compliance with Judge Marsha Pechman's January, 2006 ruling on the 2004 Record of Decision for Survey and Manage Standards and Guidelines, as stated in Point (3) on page 14 of the January 9, 2006, Court order in Northwest Ecosystem Alliance et al. v. Rey et al. (EA Appendix 4 Survey and Manage Compliance Reviews). No additional surveys are planned for the area as currently designed. Considers new information on northern spotted owl (EA p. 12, DR/FONSI p.9). Would not have significant impact on the affected elements of the environment (DR/FONSI pp ) beyond those already anticipated and addressed in the RMP EIS. Has been adequately analyzed. 2. The No Action alternative was not selected because it does not meet the Purpose and Need directly (EA section 3.1), as shown in Table 2. Table 2: Comparison of the Alternatives with Regard to the Purpose of and Need for Action Project 2 Purpose and Need (EA section 3.1) No Action Selected Action Reduce road density by closing roads that are no longer needed for management activities and that are contributing to water quality degradation (RMP p.64); Meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) requirements by closing and stabilizing, or obliterating and stabilizing roads based on the ongoing and potential effects to ACS objectives and considering short-term and long-term transportation needs (RMP, p. 62). Does not fulfill. Does not close any roads at this time. Does not fulfill. Does not meet ACS objectives through treatment of existing roads. Fulfills. Decommissions approximately one mile of road that is no longer needed and is contributing to stream sediment impacts Fulfills. Removing two failing culverts will meet the ACS objectives to maintain and restore water quality, physical integrity of the aquatic system and the sediment regime under which the aquatic ecosystem evolved. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/CONSULTATION/COORDINATION Scoping: A description of the proposal was included in the Salem Bureau of Land Management Project Update which was mailed to more than 1000 individuals and organizations. A letter asking for scoping input on the proposal was mailed on October 3, 1997 to 124 individuals, groups and Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 12

13 agencies that were potentially affected and/or interested in management activities in the resource area as a whole or in this area. Representatives of the Scappoose Bay Watershed Council were taken on a tour of the project area on September 27, The scoping report was also mailed to two other individuals on November 3, A total of eight letters and oral responses were received as a result of this scoping. Comment Period and Comments: The original EA was made available on the Internet and notices mailed to 16 interested agencies, individuals and organizations on February 25, Responses to these comments can be found in Addendum 1 to the original Decision Document and Finding of No Significant Impact. Based on the original response, the EA was mailed to 16 agencies, individuals and organizations on July 24, A legal notice was placed in the South County Spotlight newspaper soliciting public input on the action on July 26, A number of comments were received during the 30 day comment period for the EA. Responses to these comments can be found in Appendix A of this DR/FONSI. Consultation/Coordination: Project 1 Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest Wildlife Consultation In order to obtain input from the terrestrial sub-group of the North Coast Province Interagency Level 1 Team and to facilitate the ESA section 7 streamlined consultation process, on April 11, 2006 elements of the Pig s Puzzle timber sale project and the associated analysis were discussed with the Level I team at a meeting held at the BLM Salem District Office in Salem Oregon. The Pig s Puzzle timber sale was submitted for consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as provided in Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16U.S.C (a)(2) and (a)(4) as amended) by inclusion in the Biological Assessment (dated July 24, 2006) for FY 2007 and 2008 Habitat Modification Projects located in the North Coast Planning Province. Consultation with the USFWS on the Pig s Puzzle timber sale project was completed on October 4, 2006 (Letter of Concurrence (LOC) (Project Record Document #27). As a result of consultation, the USFWS concurred that the FY Habitat Modification Projects within the North Coast Province (including Pig s Puzzle) may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect the spotted owl. In the case of the Pig s Puzzle timber sale project, light to moderate thinning of 129 acres of spotted owl dispersal habitat would result in degrading the quality of the affected dispersal habitat, although these acres are still expected to be able to function as spotted owl dispersal habitat post-treatment. Treatment of 147 acres of dispersal habitat with a regeneration harvest treatment is expected to remove these acres from a condition to function as spotted owl dispersal habitat for a period of years. The commercial thinning is consistent with definitions for light to moderate thinning as found in Table 1 (page 83) of the programmatic biological assessment. The regeneration harvest is consistent with the description of regeneration harvest also contained within Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 13

14 Table 1. Should the projects not be implemented within FY as currently planned but rather in a subsequent year, the project(s) would likely be resubmitted for inclusion in the next appropriate programmatic consultation. If the projects are determined by USFWS to not be in compliance with the standards of the programmatic consultation, the projects would be changed to be in compliance with the programmatic consultation or a project-specific consultation would be conducted. In either case, all of the appropriate Terms and Conditions of the appropriate biological opinion would be incorporated. Fisheries Consultation On August 6, 1999 BLM received a biological opinion from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the original Pigs Puzzle Timber Sale. However on December 12, 2000 NMFS rescinded this opinion as part of a group of 20 timber sale biological opinions rescinded in response to a court order. On August 9, 2006 the BLM again requested informal consultation with the NMFS on the Pigs Puzzle Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest project. A BA documents actions on the Salem District which may affect listed Lower Columbia River anadromous salmonids. The Lower Columbia River steelhead trout Distinct Population Segment (DPS) is listed as threatened under the ESA by NMFS (63 FR 13347; March 19, 1998); the Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon Evoluntionarily Significant Unit (ESU) is listed as threatened under the ESA by NMFS (64 FR 14308; March 24, 1999); and the Lower Columbia coho salmon ESU is listed as threatened under the ESA by NMFS (70 FR 37160; June 28, 2005). Critical habitat for Lower Columbia River steelhead and Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon was designated by NMFS on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52630). BLM determined that this action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect Lower Columbia River steelhead trout, Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon, and Lower Columbia coho salmon, and designated critical habitat for Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon in the Scappoose Creek watershed. There is no designated critical habitat for Lower Columbia River steelhead in Scappoose Creek. A Letter of Concurrence was received from NMFS on September 13, 2006 (Project Record Document #26), affirming the affect calls for these species and critical habitat. In addition, NMFS proposed the following conservation recommendation: directionally fall trees into stream channels where cable corridors are needed through no-harvest buffers as long as there would be no adverse effects to listed species. NMFS also requested that they be notified whether or not this conservation recommendation is implemented in order to maintain a record of the activities that benefit listed species or critical habitat. Project 2 Road Decommissioning Wildlife Consultation Consultation with the USFWS on the Road Decommissioning project was not required as it was determined to be of No Effect upon all ESA listed or proposed wildlife species and their designated critical habitat. Fisheries Consultation Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 14

15 This project is covered under a programmatic consultation Endangered Species Act- Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion & Magnuson-Stevens Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation conducted with NMFS (NMFS No: 2005/04371 and 2005/06960). This project would be accomplished according to the terms and conditions of this biological opinion which is valid through September 30, 2007 or subsequent consultation. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon review of the Pig s Puzzle Projects - Reissue EA and supporting project record, I have determined that these projects are not major federal actions and would not significantly affect the quality of the human environment, individually or cumulatively with other actions in the general area. No environmental effects meet the definition of significance in context or intensity as defined in 40 CFR There are no site specific impacts that would require supplemental/additional information to the analysis done in the Salem District Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement, September 1994 (RMP/FEIS). Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not needed. This finding is based on the following discussion: Context. The projects are site-specific actions directly involving a total of 277 acres of BLM administered land, along with actions occurring on various haul routes; and road decommissioning activities on approximately one mile of BLM-administered roads. These actions by themselves do not have international, national, region-wide, or state-wide importance. The discussion of the significance criteria that follows applies to the intended actions and is within the context of local importance. The EA details the effects of the action alternatives; none of the effects identified, including direct, indirect and cumulative effects, are considered to be significant and do not exceed those effects described in the RMP/FEIS. Intensity. The following discussion is organized around the Ten Significance Criteria described in 40 CFR The discussions below apply to the two projects contained within the Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue EA. 1. Impacts may be both beneficial and adverse. Due to the projects design features, the most noteworthy predicted effects include: (1) increased tree diameter growth, increased crown development and greater understory diversity within the 129 acres of stands that are commercially thinned; (2) reduced current and future loss of Douglas-fir volume from root disease in the 147 acres of regeneration harvest; (3) consistency with ACS (Aquatic Conservation Strategy) objectives; (4) no adverse impacts to any special status species that would contribute toward the need to elevate their status to any higher level of concern including the need to list under the ESA; (5) no impacts to any special attention (or Survey and Manage) species known sites; (6) slight, short-term increases in sediment are anticipated from road construction, road improvement and culvert removal, and timber harvest activities; (7) long-term reduction in sediment from failing culverts that will be replaced or removed; (8) no impacts to water temperature, streamflow or stream channel stability; (9) adverse cumulative impacts to spotted owl dispersal habitat; and (10) social and economic benefits to the local communities through the supply of timber to local mills and some contract work associated with the Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 15

16 road decommissioning project. None of the environmental effects disclosed above and discussed in detail in Chapters 2, 3 and 4 of the EA and associated appendices are considered significant, nor do the effects exceed those described in the RMP/FEIS. 2. The degree to which the selected alternative will affect public health or safety. Public health and safety were not identified as an issue. The projects are comparable to other timber harvest and road decommissioning projects which have occurred within the Salem District with no unusual health or safety concerns. 3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farm lands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. There are no historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farm lands, wetlands, wild or scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas located within the project area (EA, Appendix 1). 4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. Extensive scoping of the projects resulted in only three project specific comment letters, with a total of 17 comments. The disposition of public comments is contained in Appendix A of this document. The effects of the projects on the quality of the human environment were adequately understood by the interdisciplinary team to provide an environmental analysis. A complete disclosure of the predicted effects of the projects is contained within Chapters 2 and 3 of the EA and associated appendices. 5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The projects are not unique or unusual. The BLM has experience implementing similar projects in similar areas and have found effects to be reasonably predictable. The environmental effects to the human environment are fully analyzed in the EA. There are no predicted effects on the human environment which are considered to be highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. 6. The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. The projects do not set a precedent for future actions that may have significant effects, nor do they represent a decision in principle about a future consideration. Any future projects will be evaluated through the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) process and will stand on their own as to environmental effects. 7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. The interdisciplinary team evaluated the projects in context of past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions (Appendix 2). Although some cumulative effects have been identified (spotted owl dispersal habitat) no significant cumulative effects are predicted. A complete disclosure of the effects of the action alternatives is contained in Chapters 2 and 3 of the EA. 8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or other objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources. The projects Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 16

17 will not adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or other objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, nor will the projects cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources (EA, Appendix 1). 9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its designated critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act of The Pig s Puzzle Timber Sale Project May Affect but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect the northern spotted owl as a result of habitat modification. This is based upon all the identified beneficial and adverse impacts including cumulative impacts, resulting from forest management treatments on a total of 276 acres of spotted owl dispersal habitat through a combination of regeneration harvest and commercial thinning. Approximately 147 acres would be treated with a regeneration harvest and 129 acres would be treated with a density management or commercial thinning treatment. Those acres treated with a regeneration harvest would be removed from a condition to function as spotted owl dispersal habitat. Post-harvest, those acres treated with a density management or commercial thinning operation would be expected to continue to function as spotted owl dispersal habitat in a degraded condition. The project would be implemented in an area where the affected BLM-administered lands are in relative geographic or biologic isolation creating a low likelihood that this habitat currently facilitates owl dispersal between blocks of suitable habitat. Consultation with the USFWS on the Pig s Puzzle Road Decommissioning project was not required as it was determined to be of No Effect upon all ESA listed or proposed wildlife species and their designated critical habitat Consultation with the NMFS over the Pigs Puzzle Timber Sale, which concluded with the receipt of a Letter of Concurrence, described the potential of effects to ESA listed fish species or critical habitat. NMFS concluded that the negative effects of the action as proposed are discountable or insignificant. There are no ESA listed or proposed-for-listing plant species within the project areas. 10. Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. The projects do not violate any known Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. The EA and supporting Project Record contain discussions pertaining to the Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Coastal Zone Manage Act, Executive Order (Environmental Justice), Oregon Scenic Waterways Act, and Executive Order (Adverse Energy Impact). State, local, and tribal interests were given the opportunity to participate in the environmental analysis process. Furthermore, the projects are consistent with applicable land management plans, policies, and programs. Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 17

18 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OPPORTUNITIES The decision described in this document is a forest management decision. Administrative remedies are available to those who believe they will be adversely affected by this decision. Administrative recourse is available in accordance with BLM Forest Management regulations and must follow the procedures and requirements described in 43 CFR $ Administrative Remedies. The effective date of this decision will be the date of publication (October 18, 2006) of the notice of decision in the South County Spotlight. Publication of this notice establishes the date initiating the 15- day protest period provided for in accordance with 43 CFR $5003.3(a). To protest this decision a person must submit a written protest to William B. Keller, Tillamook Field Manager, 4610 Third Street, Tillamook, Oregon by the close of business (4:OO p.m.) not more than 15 days after publication of the decision notice (November 2,2006). The protest must clearly and concisely state the reasons why the decision is believed to be in error. Only signed hard copies of protests that are delivered to the Tillamook Resource Area will be accepted. Faxed or ed protests will not be considered. The remand from IBLA described in the Introduction gave BLM jurisdiction regarding a new protest decision. Because BLM reconsidered the original decision protested in its entirety and the public now has the opportunity to protest this new decision on Pig's Puzzle, the 1998 protest has been rendered moot. The following is protestable now: Project 1 - Commercial Thinning and Regeneration Harvest Project: Any objection to the commercial thinning and regeneration harvest project design or my decision to go forward with this project must be filed at this time in accordance with the protest process outlined above. The Pig's Puzzle timber sale will not be resold. I will proceed with the implementation of the decision through the BLM contracting process. Project 2 - Road Decommissioning Project: Any objection to the road decommissioning project design or my decision to go forward with this project must be filed at this time in accordance with the protest process outlined Approved by: ~fillhin B. ~el'fer Tillamook Resource Area Field Manager Date / Pig's Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale'and FONSI EA # ORO

19 APPENDIX A: RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE PIG S PUZZLE PROJECTS REISSUE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA#OR ) On July , a copy of the Pig s Puzzle Projects EA (Environmental Assessment), including Appendices, was sent to 16 individuals, organizations and agencies (Project Record Document 15). As a result of this scoping effort, three letters and s providing comments were received - Project Record Document 20 from Rob Freres at Freres Lumber, Co., Project Record Document 21 from Doug Heiken at Oregon Natural Resources Council, and Project Record Document 22 from Rita Beaston at Scappoose Bay Watershed Council. The following are comments received and BLM s responses to those comments. Project Record Document 20 Rob Freres, Freres Lumber Co. Comment #1 We request that the road decommissioning be minimized or eliminated. The road may not be planned for management use but may by useful for fire fighting or recreation. We hate to see valuable public assets such as the 4/10ths of one mile of new road obliterated. BLM Response: As stated in the EA (p. 61), the road decommissioning project is implementing management direction from the ROD/RMP to 1) reduce road density by closing roads that are no longer needed for management activities and that are contributing to water quality degradation (ROD/RMP p. 64); and 2) to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) requirements by closing and stabilizing, or obliterating and stabilizing roads based on the ongoing and potential effects to ACS objectives and considering short-term and long-term transportation needs (ROD/RMP p. 62). The existing road that would be decommissioned is not currently drivable as it is overgrown is places with vegetation, it is natural-surfaced and is impassable when wet, and the road has failed at two stream crossings. The new roads that would be decommissioned are relatively short spur roads that would also be natural-surfaced. All of these roads are behind private industry gates, and so are not accessible to the public. Project Record Document 21 Doug Heiken, Oregon Natural Resources Council Comment #1 - Spotted owl significant impacts and significant new information BLM has an ESA obligation to "conserve" the owl, which is synonymous with recovery, which will require well-distributed habitat to support well-distributed owls. This project is located in an areas with limited federal lands and very limited spotted owl habitat. In order to maintain the owl welldistributed, BLM must maintain and restore mature and old-growth forests. Regeneration harvest as proposed in this project will have significant adverse impacts on opportunities for spotted owl recovery. This requires preparation of an EIS. Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 19

20 The BLM cannot rely on the cumulative impacts analysis in the 1994 SEIS for the NWFP because there is significant new information that has not previously been comprehensively considered in any rangewide NEPA analysis. BLM Response: In order to obtain input from the terrestrial sub-group of the North Coast Province Interagency Level 1 Team and to facilitate the ESA section 7 streamlined consultation process, on April 11, 2006 elements of the Pig s Puzzle project and the associated analysis were discussed with the Level I team at a meeting held at the BLM Salem District Office in Salem Oregon. Discussions with the Level I team included the fact that the Pig s Puzzle project would be implemented in an area where the affected BLM-administered lands are in relative geographic or biologic isolation creating a low likelihood that this habitat currently facilitates owl dispersal between blocks of suitable habitat. The cumulative impacts resulting from removing dispersal habitat through regeneration harvest and degrading dispersal habitat through commercial thinning in an area currently considered to be lacking adequate habitat were also discussed. The Level I team concurred with BLM s determination that the Pig s Puzzle Project May Affect but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect the spotted owl as a result of habitat modification. The BLM has considered new information on the northern spotted owl to which you generally refer. The following information was considered in the analysis of the proposed project: a/ Scientific Evaluation of the Status of the Northern Spotted Owl (Sustainable Ecosystems Institute, Courtney et al. 2004); b/status and Trends in Demography of Northern Spotted Owls, (Anthony et al. 2004); c/ Northern Spotted Owl Five Year Review: Summary and Evaluation (USFWS, November 2004); and d/northwest Forest Plan The First Ten Years ( ): Status and trend of northern spotted owl populations and habitat, PNW Station Edit Draft (Lint, Technical Coordinator, 2005). To summarize these reports, although the agencies anticipated a decline of NSO populations under land and resource management plans during the past decade, the reports identified greater than expected NSO population declines in Washington and northern portions of Oregon, and more stationary populations in southern Oregon and northern California. The reports did not find a direct correlation between habitat conditions and changes in NSO populations, and they were inconclusive as to the cause of the declines. Lag effects from prior harvest of suitable habitat, competition with Barred Owls, and habitat loss due to wildfire were identified as current threats; West Nile Virus and Sudden Oak Death were identified as potential new threats. Complex interactions are likely among the various factors. This information has not been found to be in conflict with the NWFP or the RMP (Evaluation of the Salem District Resource Management Plan Relative to Four Northern Spotted Owl Reports, September 6, 2005). Comment #2 - Matrix areas should be managed at least for high quality dispersal habitat which is similar to NRF habitat. Spotted owl dispersal will be best met if they are moving through high quality habitat with safe opportunities for foraging and roosting. Regen harvest conflicts with this objective, especially in this landscape setting where dispersal habitat, and especially high quality dispersal habitat is so limited. In order to maintain higher quality dispersal habitat, the BLM should refrain from regen harvest and should retain significant dead wood in the thinning units BLM Response: Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 20

21 See the BLM response to ONRC comment #1 for a discussion of the effects of this project on spotted owl dispersal habitat. A number of design features have been incorporated into the commercial thinning which address the maintenance of desirable stand features and habitat diversity including the promotion of spotted owl dispersal habitat. These design features are part of the proposed action and include the maintenance of at least a 40% canopy closure in thinning units and reserving all hardwood trees primarily red alder and bigleaf maple. In addition, other design features have been incorporated into the project to address CWD habitat elements within the thinning units. These design features include the retention of green trees with defect such as cavities, or dead, forked or broken tops; retaining reserved trees within Riparian Reserves that would be cut to create skyline corridors to augment coarse woody debris; if possible maintaining reserve trees that must be topped for operational purposes (e.g. lift or tail trees) on site to augment snag and downed woody debris habitat; and retaining existing coarse woody debris and snags that are cut or knocked over during logging operations. Comment #3 - New information on snags and CWD indicate that regen harvest practices are inconsistent with patterns of natural disturbance. Recent science indicates that there is significant new information indicating that the BLM's snag standards are out-dated and they are inadequate to maintain dead-wood-associated species as a fully functional part of forests after regen harvest because regen harvest captures nearly 100% of the mortality whereas natural disturbance left behind abundant legacies for dead wood associated species. Since the stands proposed for harvest in this project are surrounded by intensively logged non-federal lands, these parcels of BLM land play a crucial role in providing habitat for dead wood associated species. The EA lacks an analysis of the new information on the critical importance of dead wood and the inadequacy of BLM's snag standards. Bringing BLM into compliance will require a new programmatic EIS evaluating and comparing several methods of maitaining dead-wood -associated species as a fully functional part of the forest. BLM Response: The Salem District ROD/RMP provides the guidance for our land management objectives, and action/direction. Re-evaluation of management objectives and action/direction for Matrix (GFMA) lands is beyond the scope of this EA. The objectives described for GFMA timber sales are listed under EA section Purpose and Need for Action and Decision Factors (EA p. 5). See also ROD/RMP p. 20. The EA in section 2.2.2, the Proposed Action, addresses snag and down wood retention under Desired Stand Features, Diversity, and Protection (EA pp. 10, 11). Within the GFMA, where timber production is the primary emphasis, the BLM seeks to balance timber, habitat and other objectives with layout, prescriptions and other design features that are designed to provide different habitats while producing timber. If the respondents have site specific information or recommendations on specific dead wood associated species they have not presented that information. Comment #4 Root disease Root disease should not be viewed as a problem but rather as an important part of ecological diversity across the landscape. Current practices on non-federal lands and past practices on BLM lands have Pig s Puzzle Projects Reissue - Decision Rationale and FONSI EA # OR p. 21